Navigating the evolving seas of cross-border insolvency: The shift towards COMI and the Model Law approach in Hong Kong; Re Global Brands Group Holding Ltd (In Liquidation) [2022] 3 HKLRD 316 (Coram Harris J) [case comment]
{"title":"Navigating the evolving seas of cross-border insolvency: The shift towards COMI and the Model Law approach in Hong Kong; Re Global Brands Group Holding Ltd (In Liquidation) [2022] 3 HKLRD 316 (Coram Harris J) [case comment]","authors":"Alric Wong","doi":"10.1002/iir.1551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In cross-border insolvency cases involving foreign liquidators, Hong Kong courts traditionally adhered to two criteria for recognition and assistance: the collective nature of insolvency proceedings and the commencement of such proceedings in the company's place of incorporation. This approach has evolved following <i>Re Global Brands</i>, marking a shift towards considering the company's COMI as a more practical criterion, and highlighting the impracticalities of using the place of incorporation as the primary criterion. Despite the benefits, the COMI Criterion introduces complexities, such as potential non-recognition and conflicting rulings between jurisdictions. There are also questions surrounding the differences between the principle of modified universalism under common law and the UNCITRAL Model Law. This article analyses the impacts brought about by the transition to the COMI Criterion, and encourages consideration of the adoption of the Model Law by Hong Kong in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":53971,"journal":{"name":"International Insolvency Review","volume":"33 3","pages":"522-532"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Insolvency Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/iir.1551","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In cross-border insolvency cases involving foreign liquidators, Hong Kong courts traditionally adhered to two criteria for recognition and assistance: the collective nature of insolvency proceedings and the commencement of such proceedings in the company's place of incorporation. This approach has evolved following Re Global Brands, marking a shift towards considering the company's COMI as a more practical criterion, and highlighting the impracticalities of using the place of incorporation as the primary criterion. Despite the benefits, the COMI Criterion introduces complexities, such as potential non-recognition and conflicting rulings between jurisdictions. There are also questions surrounding the differences between the principle of modified universalism under common law and the UNCITRAL Model Law. This article analyses the impacts brought about by the transition to the COMI Criterion, and encourages consideration of the adoption of the Model Law by Hong Kong in the future.
在不断演变的跨国界破产海洋中航行:向主要利益中心的转变和香港的《示范法》方法;关于 Global Brands Group Holding Ltd(清算中)[2022] 3 HKLRD 316(Coram Harris J)[案例评论]
在涉及外国清算人的跨国界破产案件中,香港法院传统上坚持两个承认和 协助标准:破产程序的集体性质和在公司注册地启动这类程序。这种方法在 Re Global Brands 案之后有所发展,标志着转向将公司的主要利益中心作为更实用的标准,并突出了将公司注册地作为主要标准的不实用性。尽管主要利益中心标准有其益处,但也带来了一些复杂问题,例如可能不被承认以及不同司法管辖区之间的裁决相互冲突。普通法和《贸易法委员会示范法》中经修改的普遍性原则之间的差异也存在问题。本文分析了向主要利益中心标准过渡所带来的影响,并鼓励香港在未来考虑采用《示范法》。